TECHNICAL FIELD
[0001] The present invention relates to a method for determining whether a determination
standard value used for an inspection of an intermediate product is suitable, assuming
that a final inspection of a final-form product that is formed through a plurality
of steps and an intermediate inspection of an intermediate product that is formed
in a step prior to the final step are performed. The present invention also relates
to a method for determining an optimum value for the determination standard value
used for the inspection of the intermediate product and an inspection system for a
substrate on which components are mounted to which the method has been applied, and
a computer system that performs a simulation showing how the productivity of substrates
on which components are mounted changes depending on the determination standard value.
RELATED ART
[0002] In general, a substrate on which components are mounted is produced by a cream solder
printing step, a component mount step, and a reflow step. Recent production lines
include a line provided with a substrate inspection system in which an inspection
machine for each of these steps and the inspection results obtained by the inspection
machines can be accumulated in an information processing device and confirmed by being
checked for the same object (see, for example, Patent Document 1).
[0003] With a conventional substrate inspection system, each of the inspection machines
performs a measurement for a portion to be inspected based on an inspection program
that is set for the machine, and determines whether the portion is defective or not
by comparing the obtained measured value with a registered determination standard
value. For this reason, there is the possibility that a location that has been determined
to be defective in the inspection machine for the solder print step or the component
mount step may be determined to be non-defective in the final inspection performed
by the inspection machine for the final reflow step, or vice versa.
[0004] If the frequency of inconsistency between the result of the intermediate inspection
and the result of the final inspection increases, then the merit obtained by performing
the intermediate inspection is reduced, and there will be no meaning to the costs
for the inspections. In particular, there will be a significant loss in terms of not
only costs but also the processing time if the frequency with which a product that
is determined to be non-defective in the final inspection is determined to be defective
in the intermediate inspection increases when a substrate for which a defect has been
detected in the intermediate inspection is removed or when the line is stopped for
checking.
[0005] In contrast, if the frequency with which the result of the intermediate inspection
and the result of the final inspection are consistent is increased, then a product
that may become defective can be accurately determined in the intermediate inspection,
thus making it possible to increase the production efficiency. Accordingly, it is
desirable to adjust the determination standard value used for the intermediate inspection
such that the consistency between the results of the two inspections can be increased
as much as possible.
[0006] With regard to the above-described problem, Patent Documents 2 and 3 describe that
a suitable determination standard value is defined through a calculation process based
on measured values obtained in the intermediate inspection and the relationship between
the results of the intermediate inspection and the final inspection.
First, Patent Document 2 describes that while changing, in several stages, the determination
standard value (called "inspection standard" in Patent Document 2) for the characteristic
amount extracted in the intermediate inspection; the yield rate and the over detection
rate obtained when the inspection is performed with the determination standard value
are determined; the yield rate and the defect rate in the final inspection are determined;
the reinspection cost is further determined from these values; and the value of the
determination standard value when the reinspection cost is the smallest is used as
a recommended value (see, for example, paragraphs 0067 to 0068 of Patent Document
2).
[0007] Further, Patent Document 2 describes that in order to select an inspection item suitable
for resetting the above-described determination standard value, the distribution of
the characteristic amounts determined by the measurement process is analyzed for each
of a plurality of inspection items in the intermediate inspection; the degree of separation
between the group determined to be non-defective and the group determined to be defective
in the final inspection is determined; and an inspection item for which the degree
of separation is the largest is selected as a candidate for resetting (see, for example,
paragraphs 0057 to 0066 of Patent Document 2).
[0008] Patent Document 3 describes that for a plurality of substrates that have portions
for which a common determination standard value is used and that provide the same
determination result (non-defective or defective) in the final inspection, the process
for calculating the number of substrates for which a determination different from
that in the final inspection has been made in the measurement process in the intermediate
inspection is repeatedly executed, while changing the determination standard value,
and the standard value when the calculated number of the substrates represents the
ratio corresponding to the pre-set allowable value for the occurrence frequency of
determination inconsistency is selected as the optimum value.
RELATED ART DOCUMENTS
PATENT DOCUMENTS
[0009]
[Patent Document 1] Japanese Patent No. 3966336
[Patent Document 2] Japanese Patent No. 4552749
[Patent Document 3] Japanese Published Patent Application No. 2008-10666
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
PROBLEMS TO BE SOLVED BY THE INVENTION
[0010] In the inventions described in Patent Documents 2 and 3, measured values determined
by an actual measurement process are analyzed based on the relationship with the result
of each of the inspections, and therefore it is necessary to prepare measured values
that are determined to be non-defective with a suitable determination standard value
and a significant number of measured values that are determined to be defective with
that determination standard value in order to obtain a highly reliable result. However,
not so many actual defects occur, and therefore it is difficult to collect a sufficient
number of defective samples.
[0011] With the focus in this point, it is an object of the present invention to accurately
determine whether a determination standard value for the intermediate inspection is
suitable by a calculation based on a correlation between the measured values for an
intermediate product and the measured values for a final-form product that is formed
from the intermediate product even if the number of actual measured values indicating
a defect is small. It is also an object of the present invention to specify, by the
same calculation process, a numeric value with which the consistency between the determination
standard value used for the intermediate inspection and the result of the final inspection
can be sufficiently ensured.
MEANS FOR SOLVING THE PROBLEMS
[0012] A suitability determination method for a determination standard value according to
the present invention determines, based on a relationship between a final inspection
of inspecting a final-form product formed through a plurality of steps and an intermediate
inspection of inspecting an intermediate product formed in a step before the final
step, whether a determination standard value used for the intermediate inspection
is suitable, and executes the process including the following first to fifth steps.
[0013] In the first step, for each of a plurality of intermediate products and final-form
products formed from the intermediate products, a measurement process for obtaining
a characteristic amount to be inspected is executed, and a plurality of samples by
forming combinations of the measured values is set, with each of the combinations
corresponding to the same product. In the second step, a correlation between the measured
values for the intermediate products and the measured values for the final-form products
are derived by using the combinations of the measured values indicated by the plurality
of samples.
[0014] In the third step, a first calculation process for setting a plurality of calculation
target points in a range in which the measured values for the intermediate products
can be distributed and specifying a distribution pattern of the measured values of
the final-form products that corresponds to the measured values indicated by the calculation
target points based on the correlation derived in the second step, and a second calculation
process for determining, based on the relationship between the distribution pattern
and the determination standard value used for the final inspection, at least one of
a probability that the final-form products formed from the intermediate products for
which the measured values indicated by the calculation target points are obtained
are determined to be non-defective in the final inspection and a probability that
the aforementioned final-form products are determined to be defective in the final
inspection are executed for each of the calculation target points.
Note that the range in which the calculation target points are set may be the same
range as the distribution range of the samples, but may be a wider range. The setting
interval for the calculation target points may not be dependent on the density of
the samples, and may be set to an interval required to ensure the precision of a later
process.
[0015] In the fourth step, the range in which the calculation target points are set is divided
into a range that is determined to be non-defective and a range that is determined
to be defective based on the determination standard value used for the intermediate
inspection, and, for each of the aforementioned ranges, the degree of consistency
between a result of the intermediate inspection and a result of the final inspection
and the degree of inconsistency between the aforementioned inspection results by using
the probability calculated by the second calculation process for the calculation target
points included in the range are determined.
[0016] In the fifth step, whether the determination standard value used for the intermediate
inspection is suitable is determined based on the degree of consistency and the degree
of inconsistency in each of the ranges that have been determined in the fourth step.
For example, the suitability of the determination standard value can be determined
from the degree of separation between the numeric value range that is determined to
be non-defective and the numeric value range that is determined to be defective with
the determination standard value.
Alternatively, at a site where an importance is placed on the productivity, in the
fifth step, the proportion of intermediate products that pass the intermediate inspection
in a predetermined number of intermediate products (yield rate) may be calculated,
and the suitability of the determination standard value may be determined based on
whether the calculated value indicates a value greater than or equal to the standard
required by the user.
[0017] According to the above-described method, after a correlation between the actually
obtained measured values for the intermediate products and the final-form products
has been determined, the degree of consistency between the intermediate inspection
result and the final inspection result and the degree of inconsistency therebetween
are determined without relying on these actual measured values. Accordingly, even
if the number of samples including actual measured values, in particular, measured
values indicating a defect, is not sufficient, it is possible to accurately determine
the degree of consistency and the degree of inconsistency between the inspection results.
This enables precision to be ensured also for the suitability of the determination
standard value.
[0018] In a preferred embodiment of the above-described method, in the second step, a regression
line between the measured values for the intermediate products and the measured values
for the final-form products is derived. In the first calculation process of the third
step, a mean value of the measured values of the final-form products is determined
by applying the measured values corresponding to the calculation target points to
the formula of the regression line, and a variation in the measured values of the
final-form products is calculated by correcting the standard error of the regression
line using a correction function that functions to decrease the value of the standard
error with an increase in the difference between a mean value of the measured values
for the intermediate products that are indicated by the plurality of samples and the
measured values indicated by the calculation target points.
[0019] When a regression line between the measured values for the intermediate product and
the measured values for the final-form product is determined, the variation in the
latter measured values for each measured value of the former can be generally determined
from the standard error of the regression line. However, in view of the actual circumstances
at production sites, it seems that the variation in the measured values for the final-form
product decreases as the measured values of the corresponding intermediate product
deviate from their mean value. According to the above-described embodiment, the standard
error of the regression line can be corrected according to this characteristic of
the distribution, and therefore it is possible to accurately determine the variation
in the measured values of the final-form product corresponding to each calculation
target point.
[0020] In another preferred embodiment of the above-described method, in the fourth step,
for each of the divided ranges, a mean value of the probabilities that have been calculated
by the second calculation process for the calculation target points included in the
range is calculated, and, based on a result of the calculation, for each combination
of a result of the intermediate inspection and a result of the final inspection, the
occurrence probability of that combination is calculated. Accordingly, the occurrence
probability is calculated for each of the group that is determined to be non-defective
in both of the inspections, the group that is determined to be defective in both of
the inspections, the group that is determined to be non-defective in the intermediate
inspection and is determined to be defective in the final inspection, and the group
that is determined to be defective in the intermediate inspection and is determined
to be non-defective in the final inspection, and therefore it is possible to easily
execute the determination process in the fifth step.
[0021] Next, in a method for specifying an optimum value of a determination standard value
according to the present invention, after the same first to third steps as described
above are executed, a process for dividing, while varying the determination standard
value used for the intermediate inspection, the range in which the calculation target
points are set into a range that is determined to be non-defective and a range that
is determined to be defective based on the determination standard value, and determining,
for each of the aforementioned ranges, the degree of consistency between a result
of the intermediate inspection and a result of the final inspection and the degree
of inconsistency between the aforementioned inspection results by using the probability
calculated by the second calculation process for the calculation target points included
in the range is executed as a fourth step for each of the varied determination standard
values. Also, a fifth step of selecting, in response to determining the degree of
consistency and the degree of inconsistency for each of the determination standard
values in the fourth step, a suitable value from the determination standard values
based on the aforementioned degrees is executed.
[0022] According to the above-described method, even if the initial determination standard
value set for the intermediate inspection is not suitable, performing the above-described
method at the stage in which a certain number of measured values have been accumulated
by the inspection enables the suitable value of the determination standard value to
be specified, thus rewriting the determination standard value to that value. Further,
this method can also be performed when deciding the determination standard value for
intermediate inspection before the inspection.
[0023] An inspection system for a substrate on which components are mounted according to
the present invention includes an inspection machine for final inspection that is
provided in a reflow step included in a plurality of steps for producing a substrate
on which components are mounted, and an inspection machine for intermediate inspection
that is provided in at least one step located before the reflow step.
The inspection system further includes a computer system including: a storage means
that stores results of a measurement process performed by the inspection machines
and inspection results in a state in which the identity of a portion to be inspected
can be specified; and a determination standard value processing means that analyses
information stored in the storage means for a plurality of portions to be inspected
to which the same determination standard value can be applied and executes a process
relating to the determination standard value used for the intermediate inspection
of the portions to be inspected.
[0024] In a first inspection system, the determination standard value specifying means includes
a sample setting means, a correlation derivation means, a first analysis means, a
second analysis means, a determination means, and an output means described below.
[0025] The sample setting means sets a plurality of samples by forming combinations of the
measured values in the intermediate inspection and the measured values in the final
inspection of the plurality of portions to be inspected, each of the combinations
corresponding to the same portion. The correlation derivation means derives a correlation
between the measured values in the intermediate inspection and the measured values
in the final inspection by using the combinations of the measured values indicated
by the plurality of samples.
[0026] The first analysis means executes a first calculation process for setting a plurality
of calculation target points in a range in which the measured values in the intermediate
inspection can be distributed and specifying a distribution pattern of the measured
values in the final inspection that corresponds to the measured values indicated by
the calculation target points based on the correlation derived by the correlation
derivation means, and a second calculation process for determining, based on the relationship
between the distribution pattern and the determination standard value used for the
final inspection, at least one of a probability that the portions to be inspected
for which the measured values indicated by the calculation target points are obtained
are determined to be non-defective in the final inspection and a probability that
the aforementioned portions to be inspected are determined to be defective in the
final inspection, the third step being executed for each of the calculation target
points.
[0027] The second analysis means divides the range in which the calculation target points
are set into a range that is determined to be non-defective and a range that is determined
to be defective based on the determination standard value used for the intermediate
inspection, and determining, for each of the aforementioned ranges, the degree of
consistency between a result of the intermediate inspection and a result of the final
inspection and the degree of inconsistency between the aforementioned inspection results
by using the probability calculated by the second calculation process for the calculation
target points included in the range.
[0028] The determination means determines whether the determination standard value used
for the intermediate inspection is suitable based on the degree of consistency and
the degree of inconsistency in each of the ranges that have been determined by the
second analysis means. The output means outputs a result of determination performed
by the determination means.
[0029] With the above-described system, the suitability of a determination standard value
for the intermediate inspection in the production of substrates on which components
are mounted can be accurately determined.
[0030] The determination standard value processing means of a second inspection system according
to the present invention includes a sample setting means, a correlation derivation
means, a first analysis means, a second analysis means, a determination standard value
selection means, and an output means.
[0031] The configurations of the sample setting means, the correlation derivation means,
and the first analysis means are the same as those of the first system. The second
analysis means executes the same process as that performed by the second analysis
means of the first system for each of the varied determination standard values. The
determination standard value selection means selects, in response to determining the
degree of consistency and the degree of inconsistency for each of the determination
standard values by the second analysis means, a suitable value from the determination
standard values based on the aforementioned degrees, and the output means outputs
the determination standard value selected by the determination standard value selection
means.
[0032] With the inspection system having the above-described configuration, it is possible
to accurately specify a determination standard value that is suitable for the intermediate
inspection in the production of substrates on which components are mounted.
[0033] In a preferred embodiment of the second inspection system, the output means is configured
as a means that transmits, to the inspection machine for intermediate inspection,
the determination standard value selected by the standard value selection means. Also,
the inspection machine for intermediate inspection is provided with a means that registers
the determination standard value transmitted from the output means for intermediate
inspection.
[0034] According to the above-described embodiment, as a result of selection of a suitable
determination standard value by the process executed by the computer system, the selected
determination standard value can be used for a subsequent intermediate inspection.
[0035] The present invention is also applicable to a simulation method for performing, using
a computer, a simulation calculation for deriving, in a production line in which a
final inspection of inspecting a final-form product formed through a plurality of
steps and an intermediate inspection of inspecting an intermediate product formed
in a step before the final step are performed, a result for each of the inspections.
With this method, the first step, the second step, and the third step that are the
same as those of the above-described suitability determination method for a determination
standard value are performed. However, in the second calculation process in the third
step, both a probability that the final-form products formed from the intermediate
products for which the measured values indicated by the calculation target points
are obtained are determined to be non-defective in the final inspection and a probability
that the aforementioned final-form products are determined to be defective in the
final inspection are determined.
[0036] Further, in this simulation method, the following fourth, fifth, and sixth steps
are performed.
In the fourth step, an input of a set value is accepted as the determination standard
value used for the intermediate inspection, the range in which the calculation target
points are set is divided into a range that is determined to be non-defective and
a range that is determined to be defective based on the input value, and a probability
that the intermediate products are determined to be defective is determined by using
the two probabilities calculated by the second calculation process for the calculation
target points included in the range that is determined to be defective, while determining
a probability that a final product formed from an intermediate product that has passed
the intermediate inspection is determined to be non-defective and a probability that
the aforementioned final product is determined to be defective by processing each
of the two probabilities calculated by the second calculation process for the calculation
target points included in the range that is determined to be non-defective.
[0037] In the fifth step, using the probabilities calculated in the fourth step, the proportion
of intermediate products that pass or fail the intermediate inspection in a predetermined
number of intermediate products produced in a production line and the proportion of
intermediate products that pass or fail the final inspection in intermediate products
that have passed the intermediate inspection are determined. In the sixth step, the
proportions calculated in the fifth step are displayed as results of the simulation
calculation.
[0038] With the above-described simulation method, if the user performs the intermediate
inspection using a value that the user has input as the determination standard value
for the intermediate inspection, the information indicating an approximate proportion
of occurrence of intermediate products that pass or fail the intermediate inspection
and an approximate proportion of occurrence of final-form products that eventually
become non-defective products in the final-form products formed from the intermediate
products that have passed the intermediate inspection can be determined by the simulation
calculation and then be displayed. The user can judge whether the input set value
is suitable as the determination standard value by checking whether the displayed
information provides results that match the production efficiency or cost target.
[0039] The above-described simulation method is applicable to a simulation system for a
substrate production line including a plurality of steps for producing a substrate
on which components are mounted and in which an inspection machine for intermediate
inspection is provided in a reflow step included in the aforementioned steps and inspection
machine for final inspection is provided in at least one step located before the reflow
step. This system includes a storage means that stores measured values obtained by
a measurement process executed by the inspection machines for obtaining a characteristic
amount to be inspected in a state in which the identity of a portion to be inspected
can be specified and stores the determination standard value used for the final inspection;
an input means that accepts an input of a set value of the determination standard
value used for the intermediate inspection of a plurality of portions to be inspected
to which the same determination standard value can be applied; a simulation calculation
means that analyses information stored in the storage means for the portions to be
inspected to which the input determination standard value is applied and executes
a simulation calculation for the portions to be inspected; and a display means that
displays results of the simulation calculation.
[0040] The simulation calculation means includes a sample setting means that sets a plurality
of samples by forming combinations of the measured values obtained from by the inspection
machines for the portions to be inspected that are subject to calculation, each of
the combinations corresponding to the same portion; a correlation derivation means
that derives a correlation between the measured values in the intermediate inspection
and the measured values in the final inspection by using the combinations of the measured
values indicated by the plurality of samples; a first analysis means that executes
a first calculation process for setting a plurality of calculation target points in
a range in which the measured values obtained by the measurement process for the intermediate
inspection can be distributed and specifying a distribution pattern of the measured
values in the final inspection that corresponds to the measured values indicated by
the calculation target points based on the correlation derived by the correlation
derivation means, and a second calculation process for determining, based on the relationship
between the distribution pattern and the determination standard value for the final
inspection that is stored in the storage means, a probability that the portions to
be inspected for which the measured values indicated by the calculation target points
are obtained are determined to be non-defective in the final inspection and a probability
that the aforementioned portions to be inspected are determined to be defective in
the final inspection, the third step being executed for each of the calculation target
points; a second analysis means divides the range in which the calculation target
points are set into a range that is determined to be non-defective and a range that
is determined to be defective based on the set value of the determination standard
value accepted by the input means, and determines a probability that the portions
to be inspected are determined to be defective in the intermediate inspection of the
calculation target points included in the range that is determined to be defective
by using the two probabilities calculated by the second calculation process, while
determining a probability that portions that have passed the intermediate inspection
are determined to be non-defective in the final inspection and a probability that
the aforementioned portions are determined to be defective in the final inspection
by processing each of the two probabilities calculated in the second calculation process
for the calculation target points included in the range that is to be non-defective;
and a third analysis means that determines, using the probabilities calculated by
the second analysis means, the proportion of substrates that pass or fail the intermediate
inspection in substrates introduced into a step in which the inspection machine for
intermediate inspection is provided and the proportion of substrates that pass or
fail the final inspection in substrates that have passed the intermediate inspection.
The display means displays the proportions calculated by the third analysis means
as results of the simulation calculation.
EFFECTS OF THE INVENTION
[0041] According to the present invention, even if a sufficient number of samples of measured
values indicating a defect cannot be obtained, it is possible to accurately execute,
for example, the process for determining the suitability of a determination standard
value used for the intermediate inspection, the process for specifying a suitable
determination standard value, and the process for simulating results of the inspections
using a set value that is input as the determination standard value for the intermediate
inspection.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0042]
- Fig. 1
- is a block diagram showing the configuration of a substrate inspection system in correspondence
with the configuration of a production line of a substrate on which components are
mounted.
- Fig. 2
- shows a method for obtaining samples of measured values.
- Fig. 3
- is a graph showing the relationship in a distribution of measured values.
- Fig. 4
- is a flowchart schematically illustrating the procedure of a process for determining
the suitability of a determination standard value for an intermediate inspection.
- Fig. 5
- is a graph showing an example of the relationship between the measured values X and
a distribution pattern of the measured values Y.
- Fig. 6
- is a graph showing a distribution of the measured values Y corresponding to a given
measured value Xn, separately for a range that is determined to be non-defective and
a range that is determined to be defective
- Fig. 7
- is a flowchart schematically illustrating the procedure of a process for specifying
an optimum value for a determination standard value for the intermediate inspection.
- Fig. 8
- shows an example of a display screen showing a result of specifying the optimum value
for a determination standard value
- Fig. 9
- is a flowchart illustrating the procedure of a simulation process that is executed
in response to an input of a determination standard value for the intermediate inspection.
EMBODIMENTS OF THE INVENTION
[0043] Fig. 1 shows the configuration of a substrate inspection system according to one
embodiment in correspondence with the overall configuration of a production line of
a substrate on which components are mounted.
The production line shown in the drawing includes a solder print step, a component
mount step, and a reflow step. In the solder print step, a solder print device 11
that applies a cream solder to lands on a substrate and a solder print inspection
machine 10 that inspects results of the process performed by the device 11 are provided.
In the component mount step, a mounter 21 that mounts one or more components to a
substrate that has been subjected to solder printing and a component inspection machine
20 that inspects the mount state of the component are provided. In the reflow step,
a reflow furnace 31 that melts the cream solder of a substrate to which a component
has been mounted and a soldering inspection machine 30 that inspects a substrate that
has been subjected to reflow are provided. As indicated by the thick arrow in the
drawing, a substrate on which components are mounted in conformity with a predetermined
standard is completed by processing a substrate by feeding it into the devices in
order.
[0044] The inspection machines 10, 20, and 30 are connected to each other via a LAN line
100. An inspection program management device 101 and an inspection data management
device 102 are also connected to the LAN line 100.
[0045] The solder print inspection machine 10 of this embodiment has a three-dimensional
measurement function, and uses this function to measure the height and the volume
of the cream solder applied to lands of a substrate as well as to measure the position
and the area of the print range of the cream solder. Then, for each of the measured
values, the solder print inspection machine 10 compares the measured value with a
determination standard value registered in advance and determines the non-defectiveness
or defectiveness of that measured value.
[0046] The component inspection machine 20 detects an image of a component through two-dimensional
image processing and determines, for example, the presence or absence of a component
or the presence or absence of a mount error based on a result of the detection. The
component inspection machine 20 further measures the positional displacement or the
rotational displacement of the component, compares the measured value with the determination
standard value that has been registered in advance, and determines the non-defectiveness
or defectiveness of the measured value.
[0047] The soldering inspection machine 30 includes, for example, an illumination device
that applies a plurality of color light beams from directions with respective different
angles of incidence and a color camera. Imaging of a substrate to be inspected under
illumination from the illumination device generates an image that represents the sloping
state of a soldered portion of the substrate by the distribution pattern of colors
corresponding to the respective illumination light beams. The soldering inspection
machine 30 uses this image to measure the position and the area of each component
for each electrode and the height to which the fillets have been wetted (hereinafter,
simply referred to as "fillet height"). Then, for each of the measured values, the
soldering inspection machine 30 compares the measured value with the determination
standard value that has been registered in advance, thereby determining the non-defectiveness
or defectiveness of that measured value.
[0048] Note that this embodiment utilizes the fact that approximate angles of inclination
of the solder corresponding to the colors contained in the image can be identified
from the angles of incidence of the colored light beams, and specifies a curve that
approximates the shape of the solder fillet from the distribution of the colors contained
in the image, as the measurement process for specifying the fillet height. Then, this
curve is integrated and the obtained integral value is used as the fillet height.
[0049] Further, each of the inspection machines 10, 20, and 30 collectively determines the
non-defectiveness or defectiveness of the determination results for the measured values
for each component or each range corresponding to a component, and thereafter makes
a determination of the non-defectiveness or defectiveness for each substrate. Then,
each of the inspection machines 10, 20, and 30 creates inspection result information
containing each determination result and each measurement result, and outputs the
information to the inspection data management device 102 via the LAN line 100.
[0050] A database in which inspection programs are collected as library data for each component
type is registered in the inspection program management device 101 for each of the
inspection machines 10, 20, and 30. The inspection programs have been created based
on a preset inspection standard, and include programs for executing the above-described
various measurement processes. Also, the determination standard values are defined
in the inspection programs.
[0051] Prior to inspection, data (for example, CAD data) indicating the configuration of
a substrate to be inspected is input into the inspection machines 10, 20, and 30.
The inspection machines 10, 20, and 30 fetch the library data suitable for the component
type information of each component indicated in the input data from the inspection
program management device 101 and execute a process for associating the positional
information of each component with the library data. Thereby, an environment necessary
for inspection of the substrate to be inspected is set in each of the inspection machines
10, 20, and 30.
[0052] The inspection result information that has been output from each of the inspection
machines 10, 20, and 30 is stored in the inspection data management device 102. The
inspection result information is configured to be read for each of the inspection
machines 10, 20, and 30, and also to be read for each substrate and for each component
on the substrate. Furthermore, with regard to the solder print inspection machine
10 and the soldering inspection machine 30, the measurement result and determination
result can be read for each electrode of the component.
[0053] Note that the inspection program management device 101 and the inspection data management
device 102 do not necessarily have to be separate, and it is possible to provide a
single computer with the functions of the management devices 101 and 102. Conversely,
each of the management devices 101 and 102 may be configured by a plurality of computers.
Also, it is possible to add a terminal device in the system in order to operate each
of the management devices 101 and 102 and to display the results of the processes.
[0054] Furthermore, the inspection program management device 101 of this embodiment is provided
with the function of checking whether the determination standard value that has been
applied to the inspection machines 10 and 20 in a step before the reflow step is suitable
and the function of correcting any unsuitable determination standard value to an optimum
value. These functions are aimed at increasing the degree of consistency between the
results of the intermediate inspection performed by the inspection machines 10 and
20 and the results of the final inspection performed by the soldering inspection machine
30, and are performed for each component type or for a selected specific component
type. Note that inspection with a plurality of inspection items is performed in each
of the intermediate inspection and the final inspection, and the above-described determination
process for the determination standard in the intermediate inspection is executed
for a combination of inspection items for which measured values are confirmed to have
a high correlation between the intermediate inspection and the final inspection.
[0055] In the following, the outline of the process executed by the inspection program management
device 101 will be described assuming, as a specific example, a case where the solder
volume inspection performed by the solder print inspection machine 10 and the fillet
height inspection performed by the soldering inspection machine 30 are selected and
the suitability of the determination standard value used for the former inspection
is determined.
[0056] First, in order to determine the suitability of the determination standard value
in the intermediate inspection, the inspection program management device 101 obtains,
from the inspection data management device 102, a plurality of measured values (the
volume of the cream solder and the height of the fillet) that have been obtained by
the inspection machines 10 and 30 by the measurement process for a component to be
processed, and sets samples in each of which the measured values corresponding to
the same portion of the same component are combined.
[0057] Fig. 2 shows a method for obtaining samples of measured values from inspection results
for lead components. In this example, all measured values corresponding to individual
electrodes of the lead components to be processed are read from sets of the measured
values for the cream solder volume in a substrate that has been subjected to solder
printing. All measured values for each electrode of components of the component type
to be processed are read in the same manner also for the measured values for the fillet
height in a substrate that has been subjected to reflow. Then, as shown by Samp1 and
Samp2 in the drawing, the measured values corresponding to the same electrode of the
same component are combined. With this method, a number of samples corresponding to
the number of the electrodes can be set from the inspection results for a single component.
[0058] By further executing the same process for a plurality of components of the same type,
it is possible to obtain a considerable number of samples. However, if different determination
standard values are applied depending on the position of the electrode, it is necessary
to limit the acquisition of samples to the electrodes to which the determination standard
value of interest is applied.
[0059] To increase the precision of the correlation between the two types of measured values
indicated by the samples, it is desirable to exclude, from the samples, measured values
of portions for which a defect has been detected for an inspection item other than
the inspection item of interest. For example, in the example shown in Fig. 2, assuming
that a solder wetting defect has been detected at the location indicated by the arrow
K1 and an electrode bending defect has been detected at the location indicated by
the arrow K2, it is desirable that a combination of measured values of the cream solder
volume and the fillet height for these locations is excluded from the samples.
[0060] Fig. 3 is an exemplary graph showing the distribution state of the samples.
On this graph, samples are plotted with the cream solder volume set on the X-axis
(horizontal axis) and the fillet height set on the Y-axis (vertical axis). Further,
Xs on the X-axis is the determination standard value used for the cream solder volume
inspection and Ys on the Y-axis is the determination standard value used for the fillet
height inspection. Note that the value of the determination standard value Xs can
be changed, but the value of the determination standard value Ys is fixed to a specific
value based on the actual favorable fillet height.
[0061] Here, based on the determination standard values Xs and Ys, the combinations of measured
values are classified into the following four groups: G1, G2, G3, and G4. Note that
in the following, the final inspection is the fillet height inspection and the intermediate
inspection is the cream solder volume inspection.
[0062]
G1: Determined to be defective in the intermediate inspection, but determined to be
non-defective in the final inspection
G2: Determined to be non-defective in both the intermediate inspection and the final
inspection
G3: Determined to be defective in both the intermediate inspection and the final inspection
G4: Determined to be non-defective in the intermediate inspection, but determined
to be defective in the final inspection
[0063] In the following, the occurrence probabilities of the groups G1, G2, G3, G4 are referred
to as P1, P2, P3, and P4, respectively.
For the determination standard value Xs in the intermediate inspection to be suitable,
Xs needs to be set at a position where the degree of consistency between the result
of the intermediate inspection and the result of the final inspection (indicated by
the probability P2 of the group G2 and the probability P3 of the group G3) is sufficiently
large and the degree of inconsistency between the two inspection results (indicated
by the probability P1 of the group G1 and the probability P4 of the group G4) is as
small as possible.
[0064] Therefore, in this embodiment, with the use of the probabilities P1 to P4, the degree
of separation S between these two groups of measured values are determined by using
the following formula (1) when the measured values X in the intermediate inspection
are divided according to the determination standard value Xs into a non-defective
group and a defective group.

where

[0065] In the formula (1), P
B and P
c represent the proportion of samples for which the intermediate inspection result
and the final inspection result are consistent, and P
A and P
D represent the proportion of samples for which the inspection results are inconsistent.
Therefore, according to the formula (1), the higher the proportion of samples included
in the group G2 or G3 or the smaller the proportion of samples included in the group
G1 or G4, the higher the value of the degree of separation S. Therefore, it can be
considered that the higher the value of the degree of separation S, the more suitable
the determination standard value Xs.
[0066] However, to ensure the determination precision, the values of the probabilities P1
to P4 used for calculation of the degree of separation S need to be accurately determined.
According to the graph in Fig. 3, it can be understood that the cream solder volume
and the fillet height are in such a relationship that the greater the value of the
former, the greater the value of the latter. However, the samples that are extracted
from the results of the measurement process for substrates produced in an actual production
line generally have a favorable value, and it is difficult to obtain a sufficient
number of samples indicating a defect. Therefore, if actual measured values are classified
into the groups G1 to G4 based on the determination standard values Xs and Ys, then
there is the possibility that although a sufficient number of samples may be obtained
for the group G2, the number of samples that is required to ensure the precision of
the probabilities P1, P3, and P4 may not be obtained for the other groups G1, G3,
and G4.
[0067] In view of this problem, in this embodiment, all the probabilities P1 to P4 of the
groups G1 to G4 are accurately calculated by a calculation process that uses the correlation
between the measured values X and Y indicated by the samples, thus ensuring the precision
of determination of the suitability of the determination standard value Xs.
The outline of this process will be described below with reference to Fig. 4.
[0068] In the process illustrated in Fig. 4, assuming that the measured values X and Y are
both normally distributed, the mean value and the standard deviation of each sample
is calculated for each of the measured values X and Y (step S1). In the following,
the value of the measured values X and Y of a given sample are X
k and Y
k, the mean value and the standard deviation of X
k are Xa and σ
x, respectively, and the mean value and the standard deviation of Y
k are Ya and σ
y, respectively.
[0069] Next, with the use of the measured values X
k and Y
k indicated by each sample and their mean values Xa and Ya, the correlation coefficient
γ between the measured values X and Y is determined by using the following formula
(2) (step S2).

[0070] Further, with the use of the correlation coefficient γ, the standard deviations σ
x and σ
y, and the mean values Xa and Ya, the regression line Y = αX + β (see Fig. 5) representing
the relationship between X and Y is derived by executing the following formulas (3)
and (4) (step S3).

[0071] Further, in step S4, with the use of the formula (5), the standard error e
α of the regression coefficient of the above regression line is derived.

where

[0072] In the following, based on the correlation between X and Y determined in steps S1
to S4 above, calculations for virtual measured values distributed in an XY plane,
not for actual samples, are executed. First, N calculation target points are set by
dividing the X-axis of the XY plane at a fixed interval (step S5), and the loop of
S6 to S9 is executed while moving a counter from 1 to N. The core of this loop is
made up of the process for deriving the distribution pattern of the measured values
Y corresponding to the value Xn of the nth calculation target point (step S7) and
the process for calculating, based on the relationship between the derived distribution
pattern and the determination standard value Ys in the final inspection, the probability
that the fillet height formed when the cream solder volume is Xn is determined to
be non-defective (hereinafter, referred to as "non-defectiveness probability") OKPn
and the probability that the above-described fillet height is determined to be defective
(hereinafter, referred to as "defectiveness probability") NGPn (step S8).
[0073] Here, the calculations executed in steps S7 and S8 will be described in detail with
reference to Figs. 5 and 6.
[0074] In Fig. 5, the regression line derived in step S3 is associated with a graph similar
to that in Fig. 2. The distribution curves of the measured values Y respectively corresponding
to given three points Xn
1, Xn
2, and Xn
3 on the X-axis are also shown. As shown in these distribution curves, the measured
values Y respectively corresponding to the values ofXn
1, Xn
2, and Xn
3 are distributed in predetermined ranges including the distribution range of actual
measured values of Y, with the predetermined ranges being respectively centered on
the mean values Yan
1, Yan
2, and Yan
3, which can be calculated from the corresponding values of X and the regression line.
However, the width of the distributions is not constant, and is considered to decrease
with an increase in the distance of Xn from the center (mean value Xa) of distribution
of X.
[0075] In step S7, in view of the above-described distribution characteristics, the mean
value Yan of Y and the variance Vn when X = Xn are calculated.
First, from the regression line, the mean value Yan is:

[0076] The variance Vn is calculated by using the following formula (6). Note that in the
formula (6), the function Q [z] is the upper probability at a given point z of the
standard normal distribution (mean 0, variance 1) (the same applies to the following
formula (7)). e
α is the standard error of the regression coefficient α calculated in step S4 above.

[0077] According to the above formula (6), the variance Vn is maximal when Xn has the mean
value Xa, and the value of the variance Vn decreases with an increase in the difference
between Xa and Xn.
[0078] Fig. 6 shows a distribution curve of the measured values Y corresponding to a given
measured value Xn based on a graph similar to that in Fig. 5, and also shows the range
of this distribution curve in separate ranges, namely, the range W
ok that is determined to be non-defective and the range W
NG that is determined to be defective by the determination standard value Ys in the
final inspection. As shown in Fig. 6, of the distribution of the measured values Y,
the probability density of the range W
OK, which is greater than the determination standard value Ys, is used as the probability
that the fillet formed when the cream solder volume is Xn is determined to be non-defective
(non-defectiveness probability). The probability density of the range W
NG, which is smaller than or equal to the determination standard value Ys, is used as
the probability that the fillet formed when the cream solder volume is Xn is determined
to be defective (defectiveness probability).
[0079] Accordingly, in step S8, the non-defectiveness probability OKQn of the height Y of
the fillet formed when the cream solder volume is Xn is determined by using the following
formula (7), and the defectiveness probability NGQn of that fillet is further calculated
by using the formula (8).

[0080] Referring back to Fig. 4, the processes executed in and after step S10 will be described.
After the loop of steps S6 to S9 is executed for all calculation target points and
the non-defectiveness probability OKQn and the defectiveness probability NGQn of the
measured values Y for the calculation target points are calculated, in step S10, for
M calculation target points included in the range smaller than or equal to Xs (the
range of the measured values for which the result in the intermediate inspection is
determined to be defective), the mean values of the non-defectiveness probabilities
OKQn and the defectiveness probabilities NGQn calculated for these points are calculated.
The mean value of the non-defectiveness probabilities OKQn corresponds to the probability
P1 of the group G1 and the mean value of the defectiveness probabilities NGQn corresponds
to the probability P3 of the group G3.
[0081] Further, in step S11, also for (N-M) calculation target points included in the range
greater than Xs (the range of measured values for which the result in the intermediate
inspection is determined to be non-defective), the mean values of the non-defectiveness
probabilities OKQn and the defectiveness probabilities NGQn calculated for the points
are calculated in the same manner. The mean value of the non-defectiveness probabilities
OKQn corresponds to the probability P2 of the group G2, and the mean value of the
defectiveness probabilities NGQn corresponds to the probability P4 of the group G4.
[0082] Thereafter, the degree of separation S is calculated by executing the formula (1)
above using the probabilities P1, P2, P3, and P4 (step S12), and the suitability of
the determination standard value Xs is determined by comparing the calculated values
with the threshold that has been registered in advance (step S13).
Finally, the result of the above-described determination is output by a method, including,
for example, the display to a monitor (step S14), and the process ends.
[0083] With the above-described process, even if a sufficient number of samples indicating
the values corresponding to a defect has not been obtained, when a considerable number
of samples are used to accurately determine the distribution patterns of the measured
values X and Y and the correlation between the two patterns, the probability distribution
of the measured values Y for each calculation target point of the measured values
X can be accurately specified from the these samples, thus determining the non-defectiveness
probability and the defectiveness probability. Accordingly, even for a group for which
a sufficient number of samples have not been obtained, the occurrence probability
can be accurately determined and the precision of the degree of separation S can also
be ensured, and therefore it is possible to ensure the accuracy of determination of
the suitability of the determination standard value Xs.
[0084] Although in the process shown in Fig. 4, the non-defectiveness probability and the
defectiveness probability are calculated in steps S6 to S9 for each calculation target
point and the mean value of probability is calculated in steps S10 and S11 for each
range divided by the determination standard value Xs and for each probability type,
the present invention is not limited thereto and only one of the non-defectiveness
probability and the defectiveness probability may be calculated for each calculation
target point and only the mean value of the calculated probabilities may be determined.
For example, if only the non-defectiveness probability is calculated, then the probability
P1 is calculated in step S10 and the probability P2 is calculated in step S11. On
the other hand, if only the defectiveness probability is calculated, the probability
P3 is calculated in step S10 and the probability P4 is calculated in step S11. Thus,
in either case, it is possible to determine the degree of consistency and the degree
of inconsistency between the results of the inspections.
[0085] Next, the process that is executed if the determination standard value Xs for the
measured values X is determined to be unsuitable by the process shown in Fig. 4 will
be described. This process may be executed, for example, in response to the operation
to instruct a correction of the current determination standard value Xs performed
by the user that has confirmed a determination result for the determination standard
value Xs.
[0086] Fig. 7 shows the procedure of the process for specifying an optimum value of the
determination standard value Xs.
In this process, the optimum value Xso of the determination standard value Xs is specified
using the non-defectiveness probability and the defectiveness probability that have
been determined in steps S6 to S9 in Fig. 4 for each calculation target point.
[0087] First, in the first step S21, Xsi is taken as a temporary value of the determination
standard value Xs and the variation range of Xsi is set. For example, the range in
which calculation target points have been set by the process in Fig. 4 can be set
as the variation range. The range from the minimum value to the maximum value of the
measured values X indicated by actual samples may be set as the variation range. Alternatively,
with the use of the current determination standard value Xs and a fixed value DX,
the range from Xs - DX to Xs + DX may be set as the variation range.
[0088] Next, the minimum value of the above-described variation range is set to Xsi and
the maximum value S
MAX of the degree of separation S is set to the initial value 0 (step S22). Then, in
steps S23 and S24, the occurrence probabilities P1
i, P2
i, P3
i, and P4
i of the four groups G1
i, G2
i, G3
i, G4
i classified by Xsi and Ys are calculated, and the degree of separation Si is calculated
using the probabilities P1 to P4 (step S25). Note that the calculations performed
in steps S23, S24, and S25 are the same as steps S10, S11, and S12 in Fig. 4, and
therefore the detailed description thereof is omitted.
[0089] Further, the degree of separation Si is compared with the maximum value S
MAX (step S26), and, if Si > S
MAX, the maximum value S
MAX is rewritten with the value of Si (step S27). Also, the value of Xsi at this time
is stored in the variable Xso.
[0090] Thereafter, while increasing the value of Xsi by increments of the fixed value D
until Xsi exceeds the maximum value of the variation range (steps S28, S29), steps
S23 to S26 are executed for Xsi each time, and, if the degree of separation Si exceeds
the maximum value S
MAX, step S27 is further executed. Then, the value of Xso at the end of the loop of steps
S23 to S29 is established as the optimum value of the determination standard value
Xs (step S30).
[0091] In step S31, the yield rate P
pre.
OK (the probability that no defect is detected from the substrate to be inspected) in
the intermediate inspection is calculated using the above-described probabilities
P1
i and P2
i when Xso is set to Xsi that have been calculated in step S23. Specifically, only
the portions on the substrate for which the determination standard value Xs is set
are focused on, and the following formula (9) is executed assuming that no defect
occurs in the other portions.

(SUM is the total number of the portions of interest on the substrate)
[0092] Thereafter, in step S32, the values of the optimum value Xso of the determination
standard value Xs, the degree of separation S
MAX, and the yield rate P
pre.
OK are output, and the process ends.
[0093] Fig. 8 shows a display screen as an example of output of the optimum value Xso and
the degree of separation S
MAX specified by the above-described process and the yield rate P
pre.
OK. This screen shows a bar chart 200 on which the measured values of the inspection
item (cream solder volume) for which the determination standard value is to be corrected
are divided into ranges by a fixed width and the non-defectiveness probability and
the defectiveness probability of the fillet formed from the cream solder having a
volume included in each of the ranges are color-coded.
[0094] The bar chart 200 can be created based on the results of the calculations performed
in step S6 to S9 in Fig. 4. Although not shown in Fig. 8, the numbers representing
specific measured values are shown at the positions on the horizontal axis of the
bar chart 200 that correspond to the bars.
[0095] Further, the line L1 indicating the current determination standard value Xs for the
cream solder volume and the line L2 indicating the optimum value Xso specified by
the process shown in Fig. 7 are set on the bar chart 200. Below the bar chart 200,
a chart 201 indicating the range that is determined to be defective and the range
that is determined to be non-defective when an inspection is performed with the current
determination standard value Xs and a chart 202 indicating the range that is determined
to be defective and the range that is determined to be non-defective when an inspection
is made with the optimum value Xso are displayed in correspondence with the horizontal
axis representing the cream solder volume. On the right side of the chart 200, a display
field 203 that displays actual numeric values indicated by the lines L1 and L2 and
the corresponding values of the degree of separation and the yield rate is provided.
[0096] Further, operation buttons 204 and 205 for determining whether to change the determination
standard value Xs are provided on the lower left of the screen. The user examines
whether to change the current determination standard value Xs to the optimum value
Xso based on, for example, the relationship between the charts 200, 201, and 202 and
the lines L1 and L2, the numeric values displayed in the display field 203, and the
user clicks the button 204 if the user decides to make a change. By this clicking
operation, the determination standard value Xs stored in the inspection program management
device 101 is rewritten with the optimum value Xso indicated by the line L2. Furthermore,
the inspection program management device 101 transmits the updated determination standard
value Xs to the solder print inspection machine 10, and the solder print inspection
machine 10 that has received the updated value also executes the process for rewriting
the determination standard value.
[0097] On the other hand, if the button 205 is clicked, the determination standard value
Xs will not be changed and is maintained as the current value.
[0098] With the above-described display, the relationship between the value of the cream
solder volume and the proportion of the non-defectiveness probability and the defectiveness
probability in the final inspection and the difference between the determination result
obtained with the current determination standard value Xs and the determination result
obtained with the optimum value Xso are clearly shown, and therefore the user who
has viewed the display can easily determine whether to change the determination standard
value Xs. If the user places importance on the productivity, the value of the yield
rate in the field 203 can be used as an indicator of judgment.
[0099] However, the user judgment is not necessarily required, and, after the optimum value
Xso for the determination standard value is specified by the process shown in Fig.
7, the determination standard value Xs may be automatically rewritten with the optimum
value Xso.
[0100] In the above-described embodiment, the suitability of the current determination standard
value is determined and the optimum value for the determination standard value is
specified if the value is determined to be unsuitable. However, the optimum value
for the determination standard value may be determined by consecutively executing
steps S1 to S9 in Fig. 4 and the steps in Fig. 7, without determining the suitability
of the current value, and thereafter the determination standard value may be automatically
corrected with that optimum value. The process to be performed in this case may be
presented to the user as a process for optimizing the determination standard value
Xs used for the intermediate inspection, and this optimization process may be executed
as needed upon reception of an execution instruction from the user.
[0101] Even in a stage at which the determination standard value Xs has not been set and
before the start of intermediate inspection, if there is a certain number of samples
of the actual measured values for the measured values X and Y or if the measured values
are obtained through simulation, the determination standard value Xs for an intermediate
step may be determined by steps S1 to S9 in Fig. 4 and the steps in Fig. 7. In this
case as well, by executing the optimization process as needed in response to accumulation
of the measured values in a subsequent inspection, it is possible to change the determination
standard value Xs to the optimum value.
[0102] Although the cream solder volume is inspected in the intermediate inspection and
the fillet height is inspected in the final inspection in the above-described embodiment,
the combination of inspection items is not limited thereto. Note that among various
inspection items of the intermediate inspection, items for which the suitability determination
and the correction of the determination standard value can be made are to be checked
with inspection items of the final inspection that are used for such a process by
the above-described method, the correlation coefficient γ may be calculated for a
given combination of the inspection items of the intermediate inspection and the inspection
items of the final inspection by using the formula (2), and whether the correlation
coefficient γ exceeds a predetermined standard value may be checked.
[0103] Although the suitability of the determination standard value Xs is determined by
the indicator, namely, the degree of separation S in the above-described embodiment,
the indicator for the determination is not limited thereto. For example, the ratio
of the degree of inconsistency between the intermediate inspection result and the
final inspection result (P1 + P3) to the degree of consistency between the inspection
results (P2 + P4) may be used. Alternatively, the yield rate P
pre.
OK in the intermediate inspection may be used as the determination indicator.
[0104] The processes shown in Figs. 4 and 7 are not limited to substrates on which components
are mounted. For any product that is produced through a plurality of steps and for
which there is a correlation between the measured values subjected to the intermediate
inspection and the measured values subjected to the final inspection, it is possible
to determine the suitability of the determination standard value for the intermediate
inspection and specify the optimum value of the determination standard value by a
similar method.
[0105] Next, at a production site with a policy that if any defect is detected by the inspection
in a step before the reflow step, the substrate for which the defect has been detected
is removed from the production line (no subsequent step is performed), it is necessary
to perform the intermediate inspection as accurately as possible. With regard to this
problem, an example of a simulation process will be described below in which in response
to a user input of the determination standard value used for the intermediate inspection,
the indicator indicating the production efficiency is calculated from the input value.
[0106] Fig. 9 shows the procedure of a process relating to the above-described simulation.
The process of this example is executed by the inspection program management device
101 and a terminal device (not shown) connected thereto that work cooperatively.
[0107] The process shown in Fig. 9 is also executed, assuming that a plurality of samples
of combinations of the measured values X and Y obtained by the intermediate inspection
and the final inspection are provided for each component of a specific component type.
To simplify the illustration, in this example, a plurality of components to which
a common specific determination standard is applied are mounted to a substrate, and
the simulation is performed assuming that if no defect occurs in these components,
then the substrate as a whole will be a non-defective product. Also, the simulation
is performed assuming that the simulation is performed for the cream solder volume
inspected in the intermediate inspection and the fillet height inspection inspected
in the final inspection, and no defect occurs in other inspections.
[0108] In this embodiment as well, the process is started assuming that a plurality of samples
of combinations of the measured values X and Y are accumulated in the inspection program
management device 101. The process from S51 to S59 in Fig. 9 corresponds to steps
S1 to S9 in Fig. 4. That is, a correlation between the measured values X and Y is
derived, N calculation target points are set on the X-axis, and, for each calculation
target point, the non-defectiveness probability OKPn and the defectiveness probability
NGPn of the fillet formed by the cream solder corresponding to the measured value
Xn indicated by that point are calculated.
[0109] Next, an input of the set value of the determination standard value Xs used for the
intermediate inspection is accepted (step S60), and the calculations similar to those
in steps S10 and S11 in Fig. 4 are performed using the Xs (steps S61, S62). Consequently,
the occurrence probabilities P1, P2, P3, and P4 of the four groups G1, G2, G3, and
G4 classified by Xs and Ys are calculated (see Fig. 3).
[0110] Of the above-described probabilities, the sum of P1 and P3 corresponds to the probability
that a single portion to be inspected is determined to be defective in the intermediate
inspection. P2 corresponds to the probability that the fillet formed from the cream
solder at a portion that has passed the intermediate inspection is determined to be
non-defective in the final inspection, and P4 corresponds to the probability that
the fillet formed from the cream solder at a portion that has passed the intermediate
inspection is determined to be defective in the final inspection.
[0111] In step S63, the yield rate P
pre.
OK in the intermediate inspection is calculated by performing the same calculation as
the above formula (9) using the probabilities P1 and P3. Further, in step S64, assuming
that any substrate for which a defect has been detected in the intermediate inspection
(any substrate that has failed the intermediate inspection) is removed from the production
line, the probability P
post.
NG that a defective substrate is generated in the final step is calculated by performing
the following formula (10) using the probabilities P2 and P4.

[0112] Further, in step S65, the yield rate P
pre.
OK and the occurrence probability P
post.
NG of the defective substrate are displayed to a monitor. Note that although not shown
in Fig. 9, if a numeric value different from Xs is subsequently input, the process
is executed from step S61, using the previous process results of steps S51 to S59
and the newly input Xs.
[0113] In order to increase the reliability of the above-described simulation, components
on the substrate may be divided into groups to each of which the same inspection standard
is applied, steps S51 to S64 described above may be executed for each group, then
the product of the yield rates and the product of the occurrence rate of defective
substrates may be determined for each group and these may be displayed as the final
results. In the foregoing, the yield rate and the occurrence rate of defective substrates
are determined for the intermediate inspection and the final inspection, respectively,
the relationship between the calculated parameters may be inversed. Alternatively,
the yield rate may be determined for both of the intermediate inspection and the final
inspection.
[0114] With the above-described simulation, if an intermediate inspection is performed with
a value that the user has input as the determination standard value Xs for the inspection,
the user is able to know an approximate proportion of substrates that will pass the
intermediate inspection and be sent to the reflow step and an approximate proportion
of defective substrates that are generated eventually. Then, it is possible to judge
that the determination standard value Xs is suitable if these numeric values match
the production target.
INDEX TO THE REFERENCE NUMERALS
[0115]
- 10, 20
- inspection machine for intermediate inspection
- 30
- inspection machine for final inspection
- 101
- inspection program management device
- 102
- inspection data management device
- X
- measured value in intermediate inspection
- Y
- measured value in final inspection
- Xs
- determination standard value used for intermediate inspection
- Ys
- determination standard value used for final inspection
1. A suitability determination method for a determination standard value, for determining,
based on a relationship between a final inspection of inspecting a final-form product
formed through a plurality of steps and an intermediate inspection of inspecting an
intermediate product formed in a step before the final step, whether a determination
standard value used for the intermediate inspection is suitable, the method comprising:
a first step of executing, for each of a plurality of intermediate products and final-form
products formed from the intermediate products, a measurement process for obtaining
a characteristic amount to be inspected, and setting a plurality of samples by forming
combinations of the measured values, each of the combinations corresponding to the
same product;
a second step of deriving a correlation between the measured values for the intermediate
products and the measured values for the final-form products by using the combinations
of the measured values indicated by the plurality of samples;
a third step of executing a first calculation process for setting a plurality of calculation
target points in a range in which the measured values for the intermediate products
can be distributed and specifying a distribution pattern of the measured values of
the final-form products that corresponds to the measured values indicated by the calculation
target points based on the correlation derived in the second step, and a second calculation
process for determining, based on the relationship between the distribution pattern
and the determination standard value used for the final inspection, at least one of
a probability that the final-form products formed from the intermediate products for
which the measured values indicated by the calculation target points are obtained
are determined to be non-defective in the final inspection and a probability that
said final-form products are determined to be defective in the final inspection, the
third step being executed for each of the calculation target points;
a fourth step of dividing the range in which the calculation target points are set
into a range that is determined to be non-defective and a range that is determined
to be defective based on the determination standard value used for the intermediate
inspection, and determining, for each of said ranges, the degree of consistency between
a result of the intermediate inspection and a result of the final inspection and the
degree of inconsistency between said inspection results by using the probability calculated
by the second calculation process for the calculation target points included in the
range; and
a fifth step of determining whether the determination standard value used for the
intermediate inspection is suitable based on the degree of consistency and the degree
of inconsistency in each of the ranges that have been determined in the fourth step.
2. The suitability determination method for a determination standard value according
to claim 1,
wherein in the second step, a regression line between the measured values for the
intermediate products and the measured values for the final-form products is derived,
and,
in the first calculation process of the third step, a mean value of the measured values
of the final-form products is determined by applying the measured values corresponding
to the calculation target points to the formula of the regression line, and a variation
in the measured values of the final-form products is calculated by correcting the
standard error of the regression line using a correction function that functions to
decrease the value of the standard error with an increase in the difference between
a mean value of the measured values for the intermediate products that are indicated
by the plurality of samples and the measured values indicated by the calculation target
points.
3. The suitability determination method for a determination standard value according
to claim 1,
wherein in the fourth step, for each of the divided ranges, a mean value of the probabilities
that have been calculated by the second calculation process for the calculation target
points included in the range is calculated, and, based on a result of the calculation,
for each combination of a result of the intermediate inspection and a result of the
final inspection, the occurrence probability of that combination is calculated.
4. A method for specifying an optimum value of a determination value, for deriving, based
on a relationship between a final inspection of inspecting a final-form product formed
through a plurality of steps and an intermediate inspection of inspecting an intermediate
product formed in a step before the final step, an optimum value for a determination
standard value used for an intermediate inspection:
a first step of executing, for each of a plurality of intermediate products and final-form
products formed from the intermediate products, a measurement process for obtaining
a characteristic amount to be inspected, and setting a plurality of samples by forming
combinations of the measured values, each of the combinations corresponding to the
same product;
a second step of deriving a correlation between the measured values for the intermediate
products and the measured values for the final-form products by using the combinations
of the measured values indicated by the plurality of samples;
a third step of executing a first calculation process for setting a plurality of calculation
target points in a range in which the measured values for the intermediate products
can be distributed and specifying a distribution pattern of the measured values of
the final-form products that corresponds to the measured values indicated by the calculation
target points based on the correlation derived in the second step, and a second calculation
process for determining, based on the relationship between the distribution pattern
and the determination standard value used for the final inspection, at least one of
a probability that the final-form products formed from the intermediate products for
which the measured values indicated by the calculation target points are obtained
are determined to be non-defective in the final inspection and a probability that
said final-form products are determined to be defective in the final inspection, the
third step being executed for each of the calculation target points;
a fourth step of executing a process for dividing, while varying the determination
standard value used for the intermediate inspection, the range in which the calculation
target points are set into a range that is determined to be non-defective and a range
that is determined to be defective based on the determination standard value, and
determining, for each of said ranges, the degree of consistency between a result of
the intermediate inspection and a result of the final inspection and the degree of
inconsistency between said inspection results by using the probability calculated
by the second calculation process for the calculation target points included in the
range; the process being executed for each of the varied determination standard values;
and
a fifth step of selecting, in response to determining the degree of consistency and
the degree of inconsistency for each of the determination standard values in the fourth
step, a suitable value from the determination standard values based on said degrees.
5. An inspection system for a substrate on which components are mounted, comprising an
inspection machine for final inspection that is provided in a reflow step included
in a plurality of steps for producing a substrate on which components are mounted,
and an inspection machine for intermediate inspection that is provided in at least
one step located before the reflow step, the system further comprising:
a computer system comprising: a storage means that stores results of a measurement
process performed by the inspection machines and inspection results in a state in
which the identity of a portion to be inspected can be specified; and a determination
standard value processing means that analyses information stored in the storage means
for a plurality of portions to be inspected to which the same determination standard
value can be applied and executes a process relating to the determination standard
value used for the intermediate inspection of the portions to be inspected,
wherein the determination standard value processing means comprises:
a sample setting means that sets a plurality of samples by forming combinations of
the measured values in the intermediate inspection and the measured values in the
final inspection of the plurality of portions to be inspected, each of the combinations
corresponding to the same portion;
a correlation derivation means that derives a correlation between the measured values
in the intermediate inspection and the measured values in the final inspection by
using the combinations of the measured values indicated by the plurality of samples;
a first analysis means that executes a first calculation process for setting a plurality
of calculation target points in a range in which the measured values in the intermediate
inspection can be distributed and specifying a distribution pattern of the measured
values in the final inspection that corresponds to the measured values indicated by
the calculation target points based on the correlation derived by the correlation
derivation means, and a second calculation process for determining, based on the relationship
between the distribution pattern and the determination standard value used for the
final inspection, at least one of a probability that the portions to be inspected
for which the measured values indicated by the calculation target points are obtained
are determined to be non-defective in the final inspection and a probability that
said portions to be inspected are determined to be defective in the final inspection,
the third step being executed for each of the calculation target points;
a second analysis means that divides the range in which the calculation target points
are set into a range that is determined to be non-defective and a range that is determined
to be defective based on the determination standard value used for the intermediate
inspection, and determining, for each of said ranges, the degree of consistency between
a result of the intermediate inspection and a result of the final inspection and the
degree of inconsistency between said inspection results by using the probability calculated
by the second calculation process for the calculation target points included in the
range;
a determination means that determines whether the determination standard value used
for the intermediate inspection is suitable based on the degree of consistency and
the degree of inconsistency in each of the ranges that have been determined by the
second analysis means; and
an output means that outputs a result of determination performed by the determination
means.
6. An inspection system for a substrate on which components are mounted, comprising an
inspection machine for final inspection that is provided in a reflow step included
in a plurality of steps for producing a substrate on which components are mounted,
and an inspection machine for intermediate inspection that is provided in at least
one step located before the reflow step, the system further comprising:
a computer system comprising: a storage means that stores results of a measurement
process performed by the inspection machines and inspection results in a state in
which the identity of a portion to be inspected can be specified; and a determination
standard value processing means that analyses information stored in the storage means
for a plurality of portions to be inspected to which the same determination standard
value can be applied and executes a process relating to the determination standard
value used for the intermediate inspection of the portions to be inspected,
wherein the determination standard value processing means comprises:
a sample setting means that sets a plurality of samples by forming combinations of
the measured values in the intermediate inspection and the measured values in the
final inspection of the portions to be inspected, each of the combinations corresponding
to the same portion;
a correlation derivation means that derives a correlation between the measured values
in the intermediate inspection and the measured values in the final inspection by
using the combinations of the measured values indicated by the plurality of samples;
a first analysis means that executes a first calculation process for setting a plurality
of calculation target points in a range in which the measured values in the intermediate
inspection can be distributed and specifying a distribution pattern of the measured
values in the final inspection that corresponds to the measured values indicated by
the calculation target points based on the correlation derived by the correlation
derivation means, and a second calculation process for determining, based on the relationship
between the distribution pattern and the determination standard value used for the
final inspection, at least one of a probability that the portions to be inspected
for which the measured values indicated by the calculation target points are obtained
are determined to be non-defective in the final inspection and a probability that
said portions to be inspected are determined to be defective in the final inspection,
the third step being executed for each of the calculation target points;
a second analysis means that executes a process for dividing, while varying the determination
standard value used for the intermediate inspection, the range in which the calculation
target points are set into a range that is determined to be non-defective and a range
that is determined to be defective based on the determination standard value, and
determining, for each of said ranges, the degree of consistency between a result of
the intermediate inspection and a result of the final inspection and the degree of
inconsistency between said inspection results by using the probability calculated
by the second calculation process for the calculation target points included in the
range; the process being executed for each of the varied determination standard values;
and
a determination standard value selection means that selects, in response to determining
the degree of consistency and the degree of inconsistency for each of the determination
standard values by the second analysis means, a suitable value from the determination
standard values based on said degrees; and
an output means that output the determination standard value selected by the determination
standard value selection means.
7. The inspection system for a substrate on which components are mounted according to
claim 6,
wherein the output means is configured as a means that transmits, to the inspection
machine for intermediate inspection, the determination standard value selected by
the standard value selection means, and the inspection machine for intermediate inspection
is provided with a means that registers the determination standard value transmitted
from the output means for intermediate inspection.
8. A simulation method at a production site, for performing, using a computer, a simulation
calculation for deriving, in a production line in which a final inspection of inspecting
a final-form product formed through a plurality of steps and an intermediate inspection
of inspecting an intermediate product formed in a step before the final step are performed,
a result for each of the inspections, the method causing the computer to execute:
a first step of setting a plurality of samples by forming combinations of measured
values, each of the measured values obtained by executing, for each of a plurality
of intermediate products and final-form products formed from the intermediate products,
a measurement process for obtaining a characteristic amount to be inspected, and each
of the combinations corresponding to the same product;
a second step of deriving a correlation between the measured values for the intermediate
products and the measured values for the final-form products by using the combinations
of the measured values indicated by the plurality of samples;
a third step of executing a first calculation process for setting a plurality of calculation
target points in a range in which the measured values for the intermediate products
can be distributed and specifying a distribution pattern of the measured values of
the final-form products that corresponds to the measured values indicated by the calculation
target points based on the correlation derived in the second step, and a second calculation
process for determining, based on the relationship between the distribution pattern
and the determination standard value used for the final inspection, a probability
that the final-form products formed from the intermediate products for which the measured
values indicated by the calculation target points are obtained are determined to be
non-defective in the final inspection and a probability that said final-form products
are determined to be defective in the final inspection, the third step being executed
for each of the calculation target points;
a fourth step of accepting an input of a set value as the determination standard value
used for the intermediate inspection, dividing the range in which the calculation
target points are set into a range that is determined to be non-defective and a range
that is determined to be defective based on the input value, and determining a probability
that the intermediate products are determined to be defective by using the two probabilities
calculated by the second calculation process for the calculation target points included
in the range that is determined to be defective, while determining a probability that
a final product formed from an intermediate product that has passed the intermediate
inspection is determined to be non-defective and a probability that said final product
is determined to be defective by processing each of the two probabilities calculated
by the second calculation process for the calculation target points included in the
range that is determined to be non-defective;
a fifth step of determining, using the probabilities calculated in the fourth step
, the proportion of intermediate products that pass or fail the intermediate inspection
in a predetermined number of intermediate products produced in a production line and
the proportion of intermediate products that pass or fail the final inspection in
intermediate products that have passed the intermediate inspection; and
a sixth step of displaying the proportions calculated in the fifth step as results
of the simulation calculation.
9. A computer simulation system for a production line for a substrate on which components
are mounted, for executing, for a substrate production line comprising a plurality
of steps for producing a substrate on which components are mounted and in which an
inspection machine for intermediate inspection is provided in a reflow step included
in said steps and inspection machine for final inspection is provided in at least
one step located before the reflow step, a simulation calculation for deriving results
of the inspections performed in the production line and displaying the results, the
system comprising:
a storage means that stores measured values obtained by a measurement process executed
by the inspection machines for obtaining a characteristic amount to be inspected in
a state in which the identity of a portion to be inspected can be specified and stores
the determination standard value used for the final inspection; an input means that
accepts an input of a set value of the determination standard value used for the intermediate
inspection of a plurality of portions to be inspected to which the same determination
standard value can be applied; a simulation calculation means that analyses information
stored in the storage means for the portions to be inspected to which the input determination
standard value is applied and executes a simulation calculation for the portions to
be inspected; and a display means that displays results of the simulation calculation,
wherein the simulation calculation means comprises:
a sample setting means that sets a plurality of samples by forming combinations of
the measured values obtained from by the inspection machines for the portions to be
inspected that are subject to calculation, each of the combinations corresponding
to the same portion;
a correlation derivation means that derives a correlation between the measured values
in the intermediate inspection and the measured values in the final inspection by
using the combinations of the measured values indicated by the plurality of samples;
a first analysis means that executes a first calculation process for setting a plurality
of calculation target points in a range in which the measured values obtained by the
measurement process for the intermediate inspection can be distributed and specifying
a distribution pattern of the measured values in the final inspection that corresponds
to the measured values indicated by the calculation target points based on the correlation
derived by the correlation derivation means, and a second calculation process for
determining, based on the relationship between the distribution pattern and the determination
standard value for the final inspection that is stored in the storage means, a probability
that the portions to be inspected for which the measured values indicated by the calculation
target points are obtained are determined to be non-defective in the final inspection
and a probability that said portions to be inspected are determined to be defective
in the final inspection, the third step being executed for each of the calculation
target points;
a second analysis means divides the range in which the calculation target points are
set into a range that is determined to be non-defective and a range that is determined
to be defective based on the set value of the determination standard value accepted
by the input means, and determines a probability that the portions to be inspected
are determined to be defective in the intermediate inspection of the calculation target
points included in the range that is determined to be defective by using the two probabilities
calculated by the second calculation process, while determining a probability that
portions that have passed the intermediate inspection are determined to be non-defective
in the final inspection and a probability that said portions are determined to be
defective in the final inspection by processing each of the two probabilities calculated
in the second calculation process for the calculation target points included in the
range that is to be non-defective; and
a third analysis means that determines, using the probabilities calculated by the
second analysis means, the proportion of substrates that pass or fail the intermediate
inspection in substrates introduced into a step in which the inspection machine for
intermediate inspection is provided and the proportion of substrates that pass or
fail the final inspection in substrates that have passed the intermediate inspection,
and
the display means displays the proportions calculated by the third analysis means
as results of the simulation calculation.